IBJNews

Analysts: Simon unlikely to buy Capital Shopping

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Simon Property Group Inc. is unlikely to buy Capital Shopping Centres Group Plc because it will take too long for rents to rise enough to justify a price its U.K. counterpart would accept, according to Barclays Capital real estate analysts.

“The economics of an acquisition appear difficult to justify at levels that could get CSCG shareholders interested,” analysts Ross Smotrich and Aaron Guy said in a note to clients Tuesday.

Indianapolis-based Simon, the largest U.S. mall owner, made a conditional offer of 425 a pence share for Capital Shopping on Dec. 15, valuing the U.K. company at 2.9 billion pounds, or $4.6 billion. Simon attached several conditions to its proposal, including that Capital Shopping drop a planned cash-and-shares purchase of the Trafford Shopping Centre in Manchester that would give seller Peel Group a 25 percent stake in Capital Shopping.

“If the Trafford acquisition is completed, SPG would find itself at a material disadvantage to acquire CSCG in the medium term,” said Smotrich, who works in New York for the investment banking unit of Barclays Plc, and Guy, who is based in London. “Any future plan would become materially more expensive and complicated, leaving Simon with few options.”

Simon wants to acquire a portfolio of malls in the U.K. that couldn’t be replicated in a market where planning consents for new shopping centers are hard to obtain, the analysts said. Buying Capital Shopping also would give Simon’s tenants an opportunity to open stores outside the U.S., they said.

Another attraction of Capital Shopping for Simon, which already has a 5.1 percent stake in the company, is the potential for rent increases at its stores. Capital Shopping’s rents are 20 percent below the market average, according to the Barclays report.

“It will ultimately be challenging for SPG to underwrite a more aggressive firm bid given that much of the value will take years to realize,” the analysts said.

Simon’s tactics are “eerily similar” to its unsuccessful efforts to buy General Growth Properties Inc., Smotrich and Guy said. They include offering financing at better terms than a third party and making indicative offers through press releases.

Simon has until Jan. 12 to make a firm bid for Capital Shopping or abandon its pursuit, U.K. regulators said Dec. 17.

Capital Shopping, which delayed a shareholder vote on the Peel transaction to Jan. 26 from Monday, has refused to allow Simon access to its books, saying the offer “very substantially undervalues the company and its prospects.”

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Best use of cash stockpile
    How about spending a small portion of your cash on buying the Circle Center Mall next to your headquarters ?

    That would bail out the insolvent Capital Improvement Board (CIB) which is burdened with construction debt that has a ever extended balloon payment they will never be able to pay.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Those of you yelling to deport them all should at least understand that the law allows minors (if not from a bordering country) to argue for asylum. If you don't like the law, you can petition Congress to change it. But you can't blindly scream that they all need to be deported now, unless you want your government to just decide which laws to follow and which to ignore.

  2. 52,000 children in a country with a population of nearly 300 million is decimal dust or a nano-amount of people that can be easily absorbed. In addition, the flow of children from central American countries is decreasing. BL - the country can easily absorb these children while at the same time trying to discourage more children from coming. There is tension between economic concerns and the values of Judeo-Christian believers. But, I cannot see how the economic argument can stand up against the values of the believers, which most people in this country espouse (but perhaps don't practice). The Governor, who is an alleged religious man and a family man, seems to favor the economic argument; I do not see how his position is tenable under the circumstances. Yes, this is a complicated situation made worse by politics but....these are helpless children without parents and many want to simply "ship" them back to who knows where. Where are our Hoosier hearts? I thought the term Hoosier was synonymous with hospitable.

  3. Illegal aliens. Not undocumented workers (too young anyway). I note that this article never uses the word illegal and calls them immigrants. Being married to a naturalized citizen, these people are criminals and need to be deported as soon as humanly possible. The border needs to be closed NOW.

  4. Send them back NOW.

  5. deport now

ADVERTISEMENT